How can being forced to buy a corporate health care plan

[Exilednight]

be considered universal health care? How can forcing me to line the pockets of over bloated CEO salaries bring me better health care?

Every state requires you to have car insurance in order to drive, but no one would call that universal car insurance.

I agree that neither candidates plan goes far enough, but at least Obama's doesn't require people to buy something that they can't afford.

[Catherina]

1. In Hillary's head, there's some convoluted reasoning that makes it universal

Maybe the fact that earth is in the universe :shrug:

[cliffordu]

30. ROFL

Nice!!!

:rofl:

[Avalux]

2. It isn't. Hillary's plan is 'universal health INSURANCE' and puts our money in their pockets.

She has taken a lot of money from pharma cos. and insurance cos. over the years; her health care plan will only benefit them.

We need universal health CARE. It should not be tied to insurance or employment.

[Exilednight]

5. That's been my argument. I hope, if she wins, that her health care plan goes down in flames........

because it does nothing for people who can't afford it in the first place. We need a single payer system.

[rinsd]

8. Obama has raised more money from Pharm companies that Hillary

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=H04

Same with Hospitals/Nursing homes

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=H02

Hillary leads him with Health Professionals

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=H01

Health Services/HMOs

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=H03

And Insurance companies

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=F09

[OzarkDem]

32. Buying private insurance is your choice

Clinton's plan offers a choice between private and public plans like Medicare.

If you don't want to buy private insurance, don't. Choose the public plan instead.

[anonymous171]

3. They will own Hillary with this if she's the nominee.

Paint her as a socialist. It will be extremely affective, especially with the group that is currently her base (uneducated, poor, rural voters.)

[uponit7771]

4. The mindset of the independtly rich are revealed to the...She doesn't have to work another day in...

...her life if she didn't want to so in her universe everyone can afford everything too.

Projection is a VERY VERY sKrong thing

[rinsd]

6. Obama no longer mandates health coverage for children?

8 million children are uninsured because of cost, not bad parents.

[Exilednight]

7. and there is no proof that Clinton's plan will bring down the cost of health insurance to...........

an affordable price. n/t

[rinsd]

9. You seem to be ignoring the massive expansion of public health options in both plans.

Or the fact that both plans are incredibly similar with the mandate for childless adults being the big difference.

[Exilednight]

11. and that's a huge difference. n/t

[rinsd]

13. Yes one will lead to the swelling of the rolls of public health plans.

The other ignores its own emphasis on preventative care as a cost saving measure.

Because people without insurance are far less likely to get regular medical care and checkups.

Obama has even said that he may implement a mandate for everyone.

Right now? He's afraid of the GOP on that even as he is mimicking their line about mandates and "freedom".

[Exilednight]

15. Studies say otherwise. Massachusettes is a great example. They have a mandate and 20% of all......

residents still go uninsured. There's no proof that it will ever work, in fact, the facts say the exact opposite.

[rinsd]

18. MA is not a great example as there are differences.

This article does a pretty good job with the similarities and differences between the MA plan and Hillary's

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/09/18/in_ways_clinton_healthcare_plan_resembles_romneys_mass_solution/

[Exilednight]

19. Did you even read the article? Here's the first paragraph............

Key elements of Hillary Clinton's healthcare proposal are strikingly similar to the tenets of the health overhaul that Mitt Romney signed into law in Massachusetts last year. But you would never guess it from the broadsides he hurled yesterday against what he called "Hillarycare 2.0" and described as "a European-style socialized medicine plan."

[rinsd]

21. Did you read beyond the 1st paragraph?

There are a few differences between Clinton's plan and the law Romney signed. Even though Romney said Clinton's plan is inspired by "European bureaucracies," it does not open any new government agency, according to the campaign, unlike the Massachusetts law, which created the Health Connector to help uninsured people obtain insurance. Massachusetts also does not provide subsidies to small employers to help them provide insurance, as Clinton's plan would.

Romney yesterday pointed out that Clinton's plan depends on tax hikes; to pay for her proposal, she would end some of the Bush tax cuts for those who earn more than $250,000 a year. The Massachusetts plan did not rely on increased state taxes; instead, it redirected federal dollars, fees on hospitals, and other money that had been subsidizing care for the uninsured

He also contended that Clinton's plan would expand government by allowing the uninsured to buy into Medicare or one of the private plans available to federal employees.

But Massachusetts also used existing government programs to cut the number of uninsured, expanding some eligibility guidelines for the state's Medicaid program, as well as stepping up efforts to enroll those already eligible, adding tens of thousands to the rolls, said Michael Doonan, executive director of the nonpartisan Massachusetts Health Policy Forum at Brandeis University and a member of Clinton's healthcare task force in the early 1990s.

[OzarkDem]

33. Her plan has a price cap on premiums

that won't exceed more than 5-10% of an individual's income.

[Armstead]

10. Her mandates make it a political dead duck from the git go

[LaurenG]

12. It's not

It's a way to force people to have insurance. It's wrong and I don't like her insurance plan at all.

[Liquorice]

14. Social insurance is common in many countries, and has been quite successful. Both

Clinton and Obama have social insurance plans, and both have mandates. Hillary Clinton's plan is better because the mandates extend to all Americans and not just children. Under Obama's plan, if you get a major illness or suffer a catastrophic injury and had opted-out of health insurance, you will be subject to penalties before the system will allow you in to take care of your health care costs. That makes his plan inferior.

[Exilednight]

16. You don't know his plan. It's Hillary's plan that subjects people to penalties before .............

the system will allow you in to take care of your health care costs. Obama has said on many occasions that it makes no sense to penalize someone who can't afford health care in the first place.

[Liquorice]

20. Hillary's plan would pay for people who can't afford it. So would Obama's

plan. People who can't afford it would never opt-out because it would be free (or at greatly reduced cost) under both plans. If it were voluntary, the people who would opt-out would most likely be a small percentage of young, healthy people who felt they didn't need insurance and wouldn't want the extra expense (even though they could afford it), and perhaps a very small percentage of very wealthy people who didn't want to pay into the system. Those people, under Obama's plan, would be subject to penalties should they suffer a catastrophic injury/illness and require health insurance. Also, costs would be slightly higher under Obama's plan because of the people who would opt-out and therefore not be paying into the system.

[Exilednight]

22. and Hillary's plan pealizes poor people who can't fall in to the cracks................

those making to much money to qualify for government assistance and not enough to purchase insurance. If they get hurt, then they get fined before and required to purchase health care on their own.

I'm sorry, but my heart doesn't bleed for rich people who could be penalized, and there is no proof that health insurance costs will come down. In fact, I would say that CEO salaries will just be more bloated.

[Liquorice]

24. That's simply not true. Hillary's plan does not penalize anyone, nor

does Obama's plan. Both plans have mandates. Obama's plan mandates that parents buy health insurance for their children. Hillary's plan mandates everyone buy insurance. Most poor people are single mothers who would be required, under BOTH plans, to buy health insurance. I could just as easily say that Obama's plan penalizes single mothers who may fall through the cracks and not qualify for government assistance, which is the same as your argument. However, that argument would be complete and utter BS, as is yours.

[Exilednight]

26. It is true. What happens under Hillary's plan when someone doesn't have insurance and they.........

go to the hospital?

Answer: They get fined, like a traffic ticket.

[nichomachus]

23. Yes, but many countries aren't this country

Just look at Medicare Part D to see how such a plan would work here.

Companies pick and choose what they cover, co-pays, and which drugs they will pay for. It is a nightmare trying to figure it out. If you take more than a couple of meds, you can go crazy trying to match plans to your needs. Then, the insurance companies can change what they pay or what they cover at will. You, however, can change plans only once a year. It's all designed to confuse people into making the wrong choice.

The only plan that will work is a single-payer plan. Otherwise, we're no better off than we are now, where more than one-third of your health-care dollar goes into administration.

[Exilednight]

27. exactly. Neither plan goes far enough. n/t

[Kurovski]

17. There will be no major changes in health care in this nation no matter who wins.

Not for at least a decade, or until there is a very aggressive and continuing demand for it from Americans. Until then, we will get crap plans lamely instituted.

The health-for-cash and Insurance corps have us, and all politicians, in a stranglehold.

[lumberjack_jeff]

25. It isn't and you aren't.

Under the Clinton plan, you can opt for medicare.

The rending of garments over the only plan offering public health insurance for everyone who chooses it would really be quite comical if it weren't so tragic.

It's total cognitive dissonance. "We want universal health care. We want Obama. Therefore Obama must want universal health care, even if he explicitly says he doesn't".

[Exilednight]

28. You have to qualify for medicare under the Clinton plan..........

according to her own plan you will not qualify for medicare if:

a)You make over a certain dollar amount, I believe it starts around 35k for single individuals.

b)If you qualify for insurance through your employer, you will not qualify for medicare.

[lumberjack_jeff]

29. I only know what it says.

The American Health Choices Plan gives Americans the choice to preserve their existing coverage, while offering new choices to those with insurance, to the 47 million people in the United States without insurance, and the tens of millions more at risk of losing coverage.

* The Same Choice of Health Plan Options that Members of Congress Receive: Americans can keep their existing coverage or access the same menu of quality private insurance options that their Members of Congress receive through a new Health Choices Menu, established without any new bureaucracy as part of the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program (FEHBP). In addition to the broad array of private options that Americans can choose from, they will be offered the choice of a public plan option similar to Medicare.

* A Guarantee of Quality Coverage: The new array of choices offered in the Menu will provide benefits at least as good as the typical plan offered to Members of Congress, which includes mental health parity and usually dental coverage.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/summary.aspx

[OzarkDem]

31. Clinton and Obama both offer choices

between buying a heavily regulated plan from private insurance or a public insurance plan like Medicare.

The difference between the two plans is cost control and sustainability.

Clinton's plan caps insurance premiums - both public and private - to no more than 5-10% of income, but Obama's plan has no price cap. Some consider the lack of a cap on Obama's private insurance rates constitutes a corporate giveaway.

As for sustainability, the problem above added to volunteer participation in one of the plans (resulting in large numbers of high cost uninsured patients) makes will cause Obama's plan to become very expensive very quickly.

Clinton's has enough cost controls, both for the health care system and for premiums, that its more sustainable for the long term.